John Schmidt's and Corey Deuel's comments on aiming systems

[Living Legend]

Just wondering how do you guys that pivot work this into your system.
Not trying to be funny here just curious on how your going to address what CJ is telling us here.

i see no problem working this into cte/pro1 a couple ways as i am thinking about it now. Would it be worth me adding it into cte/pro1 and will there be a benefit, i dunno?

1. one way would be tweaking the alignment when down on the shot.
2. another way is by tweaking my "eye positioning or perception of a shot" in the standing position and obviously this would be the better way.

If you really think about combining cte/pro1 with CJ's technique, it could make for a very interesting system lol Cte/pro1 is a complete aiming system where as Cj's is a technique of pocketing balls ... my opinion

 

[CJ Wiley]

The Miz.... "the rest is history"

Holy sheite. I don't think I've entered this aiming room until this morning when I could not sleep. this is crazy over here, not the thread just the whole forum, man could starve to death wandering around in here.

Anyways wanted to thank EVERYONE for a pretty good thread and I am now going to celebrate my victory of reading through it by curling up with a good accustat, CJ and the Miz, 1991 I believe, hill hill great match. Watched a little bit today and could see CJ "Almost" miss two balls to the 3rd section of the pocket while applying that tiny bit of firm inside, lol
CJ I don't care how you were aiming those balls, you looked like a stone killer.

Thanks Joe....Steve "The Miz" was someone I really looked up to and I actually missed a basketball practice AND a game to see him do an exhibition in Quincy Ill. back in 82....after the Coach told me I was going to be "relieved" of my duties to the basketball team I said "Coach, that's going to be ok cuz I'm never going to be a NBA star, but someday I'm going to be a professional pool player".....and the rest, as they say is history

 

[CJ Wiley]

I am guessing that CJ uses a traditional maple shaft instead of a low deflection shaft, because of the way he aims cut shots.

CJ, am I correct about this?

My shafts deflects the object ball a half a pocket at 9' with less than a half a tip....I'm not sure how the low deflection ones react...I've tried a few of them and some I like and some I don't....it just takes time to adjust to any new cue or shaft....just ask Dennis O.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

My shafts deflect a half a pocket at 9' with less than a half a tip....I'm not sure how the low deflection ones react...

2 1/4 inches (1/2 pocket) of squirt over 9 feet = 1/4 inch (1/2 tip) per foot. That means (if the squirt isn't reduced by swerve) that your shaft's pivot length is 1 foot, which is pretty typical for normal-squirt shafts. But there's almost certainly some swerve at that distance, so the real squirt is probably greater, which means a real pivot length of less than 1 foot - a fairly high-squirt shaft.

A low-squirt shaft has a pivot length of, say, 16 inches, and squirts about 1 5/8 inches over 9 feet with the same 1/4 inch tip offset. This would be reduced even further by the probable swerve.

My very-low squirt shaft (9mm, hollow) has a pivot length of about 20 inches, which = 1 1/3 inches over 9 feet (minus swerve) with 1/4 inch tip offset.

Considering swerve, I'd guess that your 2 1/4 inch of net squirt would be less than 1 inch with my shaft.

pj
chgo

 

[Ratta]

My shafts deflect a half a pocket at 9' with less than a half a tip....I'm not sure how the low deflection ones react...I've tried a few of them and some I like and some I don't....it just takes time to adjust to any new cue or shaft....just ask Dennis O.

Exactly,
and it takes always a longer time so that you can call your shaft a *extension of your arm*. Very underestimated by some intermediate players (also stronger players)-- it affords a lot of work until you know exactly how the shaft reacts.
Heard this also by world class players who are sponsored by Predator (you could take here any brand!) - for some it was kind of frustrating until it worked good for them.

You have to know your equipment- that s it. And some still don t know it after decades.

 

[ENGLISH!]

Back in the day (60's) I didn't shoot center CB ball for most shots and I never heard of BHE. I commited to memory the effective cut angles that resulted from applying english to the CB and the results of where the CB would hit the rail and spin off of it.

I would see the shot and shape and get down on the shot with the cue to the side of the CB to apply english. if the shot was straight in, I would often use center CB.

20 years ago, I was told that I should learn how to shoot with center CB and memorize the resulting cut angles when aiming with the double distance method (I realized this myself). I knew about swerve (I didn't call it that) and how it could be useful. I didn't conciously allow for squirt (I didn't call it that) for it was incorporated into the resulting cut angles. When I got a new cue, often I would have to relearn the resulting cut angles due to the different squirt characteristics.

I realized that I could start at center of the CB and swipe at it's side with my tip/stroke and effect the desired english. I didn't know about BHE and if I wanted to aim at the side of the CB, I would move my stance to the opposite side a bit or move my bridge (FHE) a bit to the side.

Back in the day, I used a tight bridge with powder. Now I use mostly an open bridge for I can see the top of the shaft for aiming. When I appled english with an open bridge, I noticed that the shaft would move to the side of the "V" as/after the tip hit the CB. I thought that the CB mass was causing the lighter shaft to move to the side or up with follow. I thought that I was getting more spin when the tip glanced/swiped off of the CB.

Everything discussed here is viable (if you understand the words) and one can learn to adjust by HAMB for all of it. If it works for you, you will embrace it, if not you will soon discard it.

Discussing aiming and shooting is percieved differently and is often described differently with different names other than those used here like squirt, swerve etc., and as has been documented and taught. These subjects are not discussed in the pool hall where, "mums the word" or "don't feed the fish."

This in part, is why these instructional forums are usefull and can decrease the learning process. It may not make you a better shooter, but you can at least talk the talk.

Just sayin.

I hear you. You said it better than I could have.

 

[ENGLISH!]

You are starting to understand the most important part - finding a way to use the WHOLE pocket as a target instead of just the center....even if you aim at the side closest to the ball and THINK it into over cutting you'll be better off than most players....please, scientists don't scold me about telling someone they can "think" a ball into overcutting (lol):smile-us-down:...and you'd be surprised, I've seen many people "think" their way into missing in all kinds of ways....even not getting the ball to the pocket at all...the mind is an incredible tool for achieving positive results...or not.

The mind IS incredible and so is the human 'will'. I think it is Tom Weiscoff who said Jack Nicklaus 'willed' the ball into the hole. I have been doing your 3 part pocket 'technique' for many years, but not on every shot mainly for position reasons. After reading 'your' part of the thread I definitly see an advatage to uising it more consistantly & using more speed adjustment for position.

Thanks for putting up with the 'argumentatives' on this forum. By doing so you have probably helped many get better or at least have given them the chance to improve. I for one, & I'm sure there are many others, that appreciate your Champion's insights. Thanks again.

 

[sfleinen]

2 1/4 inches (1/2 pocket) of squirt over 9 feet = 1/4 inch (1/2 tip) per foot. That means (if the squirt isn't reduced by swerve) that your shaft's pivot length is 1 foot, which is pretty typical for normal-squirt shafts. But there's almost certainly some swerve at that distance, so the real squirt is probably greater, which means a real pivot length of less than 1 foot - a fairly high-squirt shaft.

A low-squirt shaft has a pivot length of, say, 16 inches, and squirts about 1 5/8 inches over 9 feet with the same 1/4 inch tip offset. This would be reduced even further by the probable swerve.

My very-low squirt shaft (9mm, hollow) has a pivot length of about 20 inches, which = 1 1/3 inches over 9 feet (minus swerve) with 1/4 inch tip offset.

Considering swerve, I'd guess that your 2 1/4 inch of net squirt would be less than 1 inch with my shaft.

pj
chgo

Pat:

Holy cow! Boy, you have this math *down*!

I don't even worry about pivot lengths; I just get used to a new shaft using my normal bridge, at normal bridge length (about a foot, or maybe less -- never took a tape measure to it ), and build adjustments for squirt and swerve right into my new aim. I'd say it'd take me about a day of practice to get used to a new shaft, and my new aim calculations are then built -- and committed to memory -- after that.

I just sight the shot line, and then get down on the shot, with aim adjustments for squirt and swerve built in as soon as I get into my Set position on the cue ball. (The tip is already pointed at the cue ball to apply spin -- no BHE or adjustments once I'm down on the shot.)

Anyway, kudos on knowing that math.
-Sean

 

[Patrick Johnson]

sfleinen:
Holy cow! Boy, you have this math *down*!

The math is simple - I only show the details so my conclusion can be checked (if anybody's interested in doing that) and to illustrate how squirt and pivot lengths work. Here's the underlying concept:

The amount of squirt any shaft produces is proportional to the amount of tip offset (twice as much tip offset = twice as much squirt). This means there's a certain fixed distance for each different shaft that the CB will travel before it has squirted offline the same distance as your tip is offset from centerball - that distance is the shaft's "pivot length". It's different for each shaft but for each shaft it's the same distance for any amount of tip offset.

That distance is called the shaft's "pivot length" because it's the distance from your tip where you can pivot the cue to apply any amount of sidespin and the resulting cue angle will exactly adjust for squirt (without swerve). This is what makes backhand english work - if your bridge length is about the same as your shaft's pivot length (or a little longer for swerve).

pj
chgo

 

[Hungarian]

I don't get the pivot part.

Could you explain in more detail please.

What about feel.

I usually just line up the shot and find a dimple on the table that my cue ball needs to run over for severe cuts and aim for the dimple.

On short shots I just grind it out and don't pull the trigger till I'm locked in


Cheers,
Hung

The math is simple - I only show the details so my conclusion can be checked (if anybody's interested in doing that) and to illustrate how squirt and pivot lengths work. Here's the underlying concept:

The amount of squirt any shaft produces is proportional to the amount of tip offset (twice as much tip offset = twice as much squirt). This means there's a certain fixed distance for each different shaft that the CB will travel before it has squirted offline the same distance as your tip is offset from centerball - that distance is the shaft's "pivot length". It's different for each shaft but for each shaft it's the same distance for any amount of tip offset.

That distance is called the shaft's "pivot length" because it's the distance from your tip where you can pivot the cue to apply any amount of sidespin and the resulting cue angle will exactly adjust for squirt (without swerve). This is what makes backhand english work - if your bridge length is about the same as your shaft's pivot length (or a little longer for swerve).

pj
chgo

 

[Patrick Johnson]

I don't get the pivot part.

Could you explain in more detail please.

Here's something I've posted before about it:

Using Pivot Length to Estimate Squirt
-------------------------------------------------------

If you think knowing your cue's Pivot Length is vaguely interesting but not really useful, you might be overlooking a potentially helpful aiming aid. Knowing your cue's Pivot Length is the basis for a simple method of visualizing squirt correction that can reduce the guesswork.

Pivot Length is the distance from your cue's tip to its Pivot Point, the place to pivot your cue to apply squirt-correcting backhand english. This is because (here's the useful part ->) Pivot Length is the distance the CB travels to be off target by exactly the same distance as your Tip Offset from the CB's center.

That means you should aim your shot one Tip Offset to the side of your target for each Pivot Length between the CB and the OB (minus something for swerve).

Here's a drawing with some detail about how to do that. For illustration it assumes a Pivot Length of exactly 12.5 inches (1 diamond on a 9-foot table), which is probably not an uncommon "high squirt" Pivot Length. Of course, each cue's Pivot Length can be different.

pj
chgo

 

[Mitchxout]

PJ, thanks again, that was amazing.

 

[Joe T]

PJ, thanks again, that was amazing.

That is cool, thanks.

 

[Joe T]

I started experimenting with what CJ is talking about. Why? Because I can’t seem to sleep! Not sure if its parenthood, businesshood, monthly grindhood or lack of poolhood! Whatever it is it is causing me to read more az and now hit balls. The balls part is good because hitting balls without expectations is kind of fun and does clear my mind.
Anywho here are a couple of initial thoughts on CJs technique in no particular order;

#1 The method kind of explains to me exactly what CJ was doing when he was playing. I was previously under the impression that his method of aim (parts of the cue ball to parts of the object ball) created commitment and almost aggressiveness towards pocketing the ball, which I’m sure it did do but on top of that add this tiny bit of inside to create a little deflection and now you have not only a committed aggressive approach but a reason why he accelerates as much as possible through the stroke.
Previously I would have said CJ is more of a center ball player that likes to force the cb around and that would not have been complete.

#2 Here’s how I “think” it opens up the pocket for players. I think it’s more of a mindset than physical opening but can give more room for error physically.
By saying to yourself I’m aiming here (which gets the ball in on the full side) and I am going to deflect the cb a little so I’m going to hit here or here if it deflects a lil too much, all of which gets the ball pocketed. We still have 2 possible errors to worry about, the possibility of deflecting a lil too much for the overcut or possibly aiming a lil too full at the beginning. BUT I think how this opens up the margin of error is the player “kind of” has 3 out of 5 possible errors covered. This could be the same if a player said I’m aiming center but can miss a lil this way or that way. Both seem the same but they’re not imo because when aiming dead center pocket you are just trying to do just that and holding the focus on just that I believe can cause more last second steering and less commitment than aiming to 1 side of the pocket and then knowing you have to cause a tiny bit of squirt to give you “your” 2 more options? When aiming dead center there is no feel of the other 2 options.
If anyone says that doesn’t make sense to them that’s fine and I won’t even disagree with you. As I said I think it’s a mental commitment that can help cause less physical errors (I think)

#3 lining up to 1 particular side of the pocket on each shot can help your mindset. IMO its easier for a player to fall on a ball too full or too thin than it is for them to fall dead perfect. How much too full or too thin could also be as difficult as falling dead perfect but I bet if you try to fall dead perfect you will start to go back and forth a lil fuller, a lil thinner and adjust like that. Compared to falling a lil on the full side and then maybe ok just a lil thinner or that’s obviously way too full. This is a tough call and I’m just telling ya what I “think”

#4 I don’t know if this was covered but I think CJ isn’t pivoting at all, he’s shifting cue parallel so he can stay straight through the shot. Watch almost any other player and you can see there cue is visible on an angle and it comes through as such. Watch CJ and it looks like he’s coming straighter than anyone else. Now anyone that knows me knows how I hate to teach people parallel English or use it myself. But thanks to you all I see some ways to implement it, make use of it or teach a student different ways.

The reason I hated it soo much was because I would rather teach a player to aim where the ball really has to be at contact and then teach them how to pivot properly compared to having them aim in the wrong place and adjust for deflection. I thought and still may think that my old way is better BUT I see a couple of benefits to making them deflect it now. A) They can focus on going straighter through, something people feel comfortable with and could lead to more consistency (I can’t believe I’m saying all this)
B) Making them deflect it could help them add feel to their game and overcome one of the biggest stumbling blocks amateurs have, compensating for deflecting and knowing how the balls behave without physically being able to see it happen?

Just for the record I use to hate fractional aiming because it called for me to teach people how to recognize certain angles and me arguing against that kept me from doing that myself for many years but once I came up with my aiming lines it was real easy for me to identify what angle shot I was faced with and with my experience on certain shots its easier to aim at say a half ball hit than it is to match up the 2 contact points, other shots contact points work better for me. At least I added instead of remaining close minded and that’s what this thread is also doing for me, adding.

Now #5 What to do with outside. I was hitting balls and was face with a ball on the 2nd diamond on the long rail and I have to come across table twice back beyond the side to get a shot on the end rail ball, very common shot. The only thing I came up with was to purposely aim to the thin side of the pocket and squirt into it using the same technique just with outside. Not sure how CJ would do that and perhaps I missed it in this thread? But the ball reacted pretty good and I got the same type of sensations.

When watching CJ shoot some shots just from that 1 match it looks like when a fair amount of outside (which he appears to shall we say dislike) is the only time CJ appears to veer off with a slight angle on his cue and you can see or at least I felt an almost uncomfortable feeling for him?

One thing I see right away is that when CJ draws off a ball with to a side rail with a touch of outside he is way less likely to over draw, I should say over spin. The cb gets away from players quite often on these shots and when it does 9 times out of 10 its too far, that doesn’t happen much with him, the cb comes off with less spin and much flatter.

#6 The mistakes? Very rare but a couple of examples of possibly mistakes I saw was in rack 3 immediately after the break CJ fired a 2 ball diagonally across center table to the right and force cb off to the side rail and back out for 3 ball on opposite side rail. On this shot a touch of that inside caused the cb to rebound more towards under the foot spot leaving a bank on the 3 where a touch of outside would have brought it more above the spot for an easy shot on the 3. CJ you missed the bank!
In the 8th rack CJ had the 8 side rail 50 degree cut, 9 ball end rail, “almost” used a lil too much inside causing cb to go 2 rails cross table to almost scratch in lower corner off the second cushion. That could happen to anyone.

A saw a couple balls that he missed but made  meaning they went all the way over to the thin side section 3 of the pocket.

This is a gr8 match by the way and if you don’t own go ahead and order it from accu stats. Both players are over 930 I believe and CJ FIRES at Steve and to me its amazing how the Miz in his cool calm smooth manner just keeps going about his business to stay in the match. If you’re not looking for it you won’t see it but I know what most players feel like when being fired upon and the Miz handled it like a true pro should. 1991 Reno open. Crap I just looked and it doesn’t look like its available. Perhaps we can get Pat to get it back in circulation? Like he doesn’t have enough to do, lol.

CJ if you have that match laying around I would like to know in the last rack how you aimed, thought or hit the 1, 4 and 5 ball. The 1 I kind of see as typical for you but the 4 5 not sure how you approached them.

I could probably go on and on but I’ll wait till I experiment a lil more. Thanks for the convo and the lessons all.

 

[Living Legend]

i think the key to how cj is doing it is, he is dropping down on the ball to the inside. His vision/body/cueing alignment is always a little bit inside. This way you have no choice but to hit the ball to the open pocket, your kind of forced into making the ball to center pocket. i bet it gives you that tongued feeling that you have no choice but to hit into center pocket. That is how this technique makes you feel like you have the entire pocket to make the ball instead of half of it.

The inside alignment also makes it easy to use inside or outside english with a pivot inside or pivot outside to center ball.

I have not tried this at the table but im betting the vision/body/cueing alignment to the inside is the key to mastering this technique and i am pretty sure i am right?

 

[Joe T]

i think the key to how cj is doing it is, he is dropping down on the ball to the inside. His vision/body/cueing alignment is always a little bit inside. This way you have no choice but to hit the ball to the open pocket, your kind of forced into making the ball to center pocket. i bet it gives you that tongued feeling that you have no choice but to hit into center pocket. That is how this technique makes you feel like you have the entire pocket to make the ball instead of half of it.

The inside alignment also makes it easy to use inside or outside english with a pivot inside or pivot outside to center ball.

I have not tried this at the table but im betting the vision/body/cueing alignment to the inside is the key to mastering this technique and i am pretty sure i am right?

I think I would totally go for that, nice. i'll mess with that in a lil while, thx.

 

[Living Legend]

i could be wrong but i think you should have a feeling that you cant help but shoot the ball to the inside.It would be kind of like a cte feeling that your torqued up like a coil. This is how it also must eliminate the undercut misses.

 

[CJ Wiley]

Psychology Behind THE GAME IS THE TEACHER

I started experimenting with what CJ is talking about. Why? Because I can’t seem to sleep! Not sure if its parenthood, businesshood, monthly grindhood or lack of poolhood! Whatever it is it is causing me to read more az and now hit balls. The balls part is good because hitting balls without expectations is kind of fun and does clear my mind.
Anywho here are a couple of initial thoughts on CJs technique in no particular order;

#1 The method kind of explains to me exactly what CJ was doing when he was playing. I was previously under the impression that his method of aim (parts of the cue ball to parts of the object ball) created commitment and almost aggressiveness towards pocketing the ball, which I’m sure it did do but on top of that add this tiny bit of inside to create a little deflection and now you have not only a committed aggressive approach but a reason why he accelerates as much as possible through the stroke.
Previously I would have said CJ is more of a center ball player that likes to force the cb around and that would not have been complete.

#2 Here’s how I “think” it opens up the pocket for players. I think it’s more of a mindset than physical opening but can give more room for error physically.
By saying to yourself I’m aiming here (which gets the ball in on the full side) and I am going to deflect the cb a little so I’m going to hit here or here if it deflects a lil too much, all of which gets the ball pocketed. We still have 2 possible errors to worry about, the possibility of deflecting a lil too much for the overcut or possibly aiming a lil too full at the beginning. BUT I think how this opens up the margin of error is the player “kind of” has 3 out of 5 possible errors covered. This could be the same if a player said I’m aiming center but can miss a lil this way or that way. Both seem the same but they’re not imo because when aiming dead center pocket you are just trying to do just that and holding the focus on just that I believe can cause more last second steering and less commitment than aiming to 1 side of the pocket and then knowing you have to cause a tiny bit of squirt to give you “your” 2 more options? When aiming dead center there is no feel of the other 2 options.
If anyone says that doesn’t make sense to them that’s fine and I won’t even disagree with you. As I said I think it’s a mental commitment that can help cause less physical errors (I think)

#3 lining up to 1 particular side of the pocket on each shot can help your mindset. IMO its easier for a player to fall on a ball too full or too thin than it is for them to fall dead perfect. How much too full or too thin could also be as difficult as falling dead perfect but I bet if you try to fall dead perfect you will start to go back and forth a lil fuller, a lil thinner and adjust like that. Compared to falling a lil on the full side and then maybe ok just a lil thinner or that’s obviously way too full. This is a tough call and I’m just telling ya what I “think”

#4 I don’t know if this was covered but I think CJ isn’t pivoting at all, he’s shifting cue parallel so he can stay straight through the shot. Watch almost any other player and you can see there cue is visible on an angle and it comes through as such. Watch CJ and it looks like he’s coming straighter than anyone else. Now anyone that knows me knows how I hate to teach people parallel English or use it myself. But thanks to you all I see some ways to implement it, make use of it or teach a student different ways.

The reason I hated it soo much was because I would rather teach a player to aim where the ball really has to be at contact and then teach them how to pivot properly compared to having them aim in the wrong place and adjust for deflection. I thought and still may think that my old way is better BUT I see a couple of benefits to making them deflect it now. A) They can focus on going straighter through, something people feel comfortable with and could lead to more consistency (I can’t believe I’m saying all this)
B) Making them deflect it could help them add feel to their game and overcome one of the biggest stumbling blocks amateurs have, compensating for deflecting and knowing how the balls behave without physically being able to see it happen?

Just for the record I use to hate fractional aiming because it called for me to teach people how to recognize certain angles and me arguing against that kept me from doing that myself for many years but once I came up with my aiming lines it was real easy for me to identify what angle shot I was faced with and with my experience on certain shots its easier to aim at say a half ball hit than it is to match up the 2 contact points, other shots contact points work better for me. At least I added instead of remaining close minded and that’s what this thread is also doing for me, adding.

Now #5 What to do with outside. I was hitting balls and was face with a ball on the 2nd diamond on the long rail and I have to come across table twice back beyond the side to get a shot on the end rail ball, very common shot. The only thing I came up with was to purposely aim to the thin side of the pocket and squirt into it using the same technique just with outside. Not sure how CJ would do that and perhaps I missed it in this thread? But the ball reacted pretty good and I got the same type of sensations.

When watching CJ shoot some shots just from that 1 match it looks like when a fair amount of outside (which he appears to shall we say dislike) is the only time CJ appears to veer off with a slight angle on his cue and you can see or at least I felt an almost uncomfortable feeling for him?

One thing I see right away is that when CJ draws off a ball with to a side rail with a touch of outside he is way less likely to over draw, I should say over spin. The cb gets away from players quite often on these shots and when it does 9 times out of 10 its too far, that doesn’t happen much with him, the cb comes off with less spin and much flatter.

#6 The mistakes? Very rare but a couple of examples of possibly mistakes I saw was in rack 3 immediately after the break CJ fired a 2 ball diagonally across center table to the right and force cb off to the side rail and back out for 3 ball on opposite side rail. On this shot a touch of that inside caused the cb to rebound more towards under the foot spot leaving a bank on the 3 where a touch of outside would have brought it more above the spot for an easy shot on the 3. CJ you missed the bank!
In the 8th rack CJ had the 8 side rail 50 degree cut, 9 ball end rail, “almost” used a lil too much inside causing cb to go 2 rails cross table to almost scratch in lower corner off the second cushion. That could happen to anyone.

A saw a couple balls that he missed but made  meaning they went all the way over to the thin side section 3 of the pocket.

This is a gr8 match by the way and if you don’t own go ahead and order it from accu stats. Both players are over 930 I believe and CJ FIRES at Steve and to me its amazing how the Miz in his cool calm smooth manner just keeps going about his business to stay in the match. If you’re not looking for it you won’t see it but I know what most players feel like when being fired upon and the Miz handled it like a true pro should. 1991 Reno open. Crap I just looked and it doesn’t look like its available. Perhaps we can get Pat to get it back in circulation? Like he doesn’t have enough to do, lol.

CJ if you have that match laying around I would like to know in the last rack how you aimed, thought or hit the 1, 4 and 5 ball. The 1 I kind of see as typical for you but the 4 5 not sure how you approached them.

I could probably go on and on but I’ll wait till I experiment a lil more. Thanks for the convo and the lessons all.

That is a very good evaluation Joe....you figured out the critical things I've been explaining to be able to aim at the inside part of the pocket and accelerate (with slight inside) to make it go into the center.....what I figured many years ago by constantly playing gambling matches is the #1 reason people started "dogging it" is because of lack of acceleration.....when you strickly play the game of pool like it is commonly taught, you find yourself hitting the cue ball with many various speeds and spins.....this can overload your unconscious at times from the constant calculations (of spin/speed/squirt/deflection) and cause you to decelerate once in a while.....this can be "unnerving" when you're playing a Champion Player for a lot of ca$h....so I set out to develop a different method...one that would not only hold up under pressure, it would perform BETTER under it....it would require you to hit the ball with an accelerating stroke and the harder you hit it, the more accurate it became (and the more feel you would have for the pocket in the process).....over time I would start hitting it harder and harder and would STOP missing entirely for hours at a time.....not to mention the intimidation factor that it generated.....I've had former opponents tell me later that if felt like they were getting beat on....literally .... so what people seek me out to learn is not how to play the game "correctly", there's many people that teach that effectively, but how to MAKE THE GAME play the way YOU want it....to not look at the situation and just do the "easiest thing", which is generally a slower, spinning shot of some type, but to MAKE the situation conform to the shot you like to hit....and there's ALWAYS a way to do this once you understand how it works...and this I have to show in person, it's just to difficult to explain how you develop that FEELING through this system of written explanations....I once played on a triple shimmed table for 22 straight hours and my only two "shot thoughts" were hit everything with a touch of inside and accelerate.....I missed 4 balls in 22 hours....all I can say is "it works".....and it will work for at least 1 out of every 4 players, if you have the type of personality to aggressively take control of your game....and not just "play it the way it wants", but to "Make it play the way you want!!!" ... THE GAME IS THE TEACHER and by the way, Joe, I just barely missed that cross side bank....faulty rubber? LoL

 

[Joe T]

That is a very good evaluation Joe....you figured out the critical things I've been explaining to be able to aim at the inside part of the pocket and accelerate (with slight inside) to make it go into the center.....what I figured many years ago by constantly playing gambling matches is the #1 reason people started "dogging it" is because of lack of acceleration.....when you slickly play the game of pool like it is commonly taught, you find yourself hitting the cue ball with many various speeds and spins.....this can overload your unconscious at times from the constant calculations (of spin/speed/squirt/deflection) and cause you to decelerate once in a while.....this can be "unnerving" when you're playing a Champion Player for a lot of ca$h....so I set out to develop a different method...one that would not only hold up under pressure it would perform BETTER under it....it would require you to hit the ball with an accelerating stroke and the harder you hit it, the more accurate it became (and the more feel you would have for the pocket in the process).....over time I would start hitting it harder and harder and would STOP missing entirely for hours at a time.....not to mention the intimidation factor that it generated.....I've had former opponents tell me later that if felt like they were getting beat on....literally .... so what people seek me out to learn is not how to play the game "correctly", there's many people that teach that effectively, but how to MAKE THE GAME play the way YOU want it....to not look at the situation and just do the "easiest thing", which is generally a slower, spinning shot of some type, but to MAKE the situation conform to the shot you like to hit....and there's ALWAYS a way to do this once you understand how it works...and this I have to show in person, it's just to difficult to explain how you develop that FEELING through this system of written explanations....I once played on a triple shimmed table for 22 straight hours and my only two "shot thoughts" were hit everything with a touch of inside and excellerate.....I missed 4 balls in 22 hours....all I can say is "it works".....and it will work for at least 1 out of every 4 players, if you have the type of personality to aggressively take control of your game....and not just "play it the way it wants", but to "Make it play the way you want!!!" ... THE GAME IS THE TEACHER.

C the only thing I can say to that explanation is Holy Sh*t
I got the message, TY
Ok that was the quick reply but I could SEE you explanation as I read it thats why I was kinda floored and I forgot to ask about the outside. I have been hitting some balls and see what you mean about inside but without spin, doesn't make sense but I see it what you mean. Can you clue me in on how you approach or stroke a ball on the side rail that has to come back 3-6 feet and you have around a 45 degree angle on it?

 

[CJ Wiley]

Ultimate Aiming System / Learning a new Paradigm

i could be wrong but i think you should have a feeling that you cant help but shoot the ball to the inside.It would be kind of like a cte feeling that your torqued up like a coil. This is how it also must eliminate the undercut misses.

This is a good way to personally describe the feeling....and that's the only way we can learn a new paradigm is to build a bridge to one we have already...and if you remember my aiming system released in 1996 'The Ultimate Aiming System' I ALWAYS either aim Center to Center OR Center to Edge...I just didn't want to explain the "touch of inside" because I knew it would be virtually impossible for me to describe at that time and would end up confusing aspiring players....as I said before, it takes me two hours to communicate it (and it be understood) in a private lesson. We must find a way to understand in our own way, and sometimes we have to break through a lifetime of false beliefs:thumbup:....The Game is the Teacher